• Presidential system too expensive – Bill sponsors
• Akpabio names 45-member Constitution Review Committee
• Parliamentary system good but country must be restructured first, says ex-lawmaker
• Adeniran: Nigeria needs new Constitution, not patching

Sixty members of the House of Representatives have sponsored bills proposing alterations of the 1999 Constitution (as amended) to transit from the current presidential system to parliamentary system by 2031, after a possible completion of President Bola Tinubu’s second term in office.

The three proposed bills were introduced during plenary yesterday and read by the Clerk of the House. Briefing journalists after the plenary, the lawmakers said they came together across party affiliations and regional backgrounds to propose the bills.

Wale Raji, a lawmaker from Lagos State in the All Progressives Congress (APC), is a prominent sponsor of the bill, which was read for the first time in the House of Representatives. The lawmakers cited the need to reduce government costs as well as robust policy debates as reasons for demanding a return to the parliamentary system.

One of the most significant differences between these two systems is that in a presidential system, the president is directly elected by the people, whereas in a parliamentary system, the legislature is supreme and elects a prime minister from among its members as the head of government.

There is also no clear separation of powers between the legislature and the executive because ministers are also appointed by parliament.

The bill, if passed, will however require the assent of the president to become law and be enshrined in the Constitution. If the president declines to assent, the National Assembly can override his veto with the votes of two-thirds of the members.

Spokesperson of the bill sponsors, Abdussamad Dasuki, said the proposed alterations, when passed, would significantly impact the national political landscape.

He said the collapse of the First Republic and the long stretch of military rule culminated in the adoption of a new system of government, which was theoretically fashioned after the presidential system of the United States. Dasuki however noted that in practice, the system imbibed attributes of military rule.

He said: “No wonder the Nigerian President appears to be one of the most powerful presidents in the world. Over the years, the imperfections of the presidential system of government have become glaring to all, despite several alterations to the Constitution to address the shortcomings of a system that has denied the nation the opportunity of attaining its full potential.

“Among these imperfections are the high cost of governance, leaving fewer resources for crucial areas like infrastructure, education, and healthcare, consequently hindering the nation’s development progress, and the excessive powers vested in the members of executive, who are appointees and not directly accountable to the people.

“Our founders in their wisdom and in a political atmosphere devoid of compulsion and having considered the interests of their native peoples and their desire to live together in a country where truth and justice reign, where no man is oppressed, and where all citizens live in peace and plenty, adopted the parliamentary system of government.

“That was the governance system of the First Republic, a period when legislative and executive powers were exercised by the representatives of the people in parliament and in the executive, and by the nature of the system these representatives were accountable to the people. For six years while it was in operation, the system worked for the country.

“The bills presented today seek a return to the system of government adopted by our founders, which made governance accountable, responsible and responsive, and ultimately less expensive.”

The lawmakers noted that although the transition might not be immediate, they hoped that by 2031, the country would transition to the parliamentary system to address the challenges of cost of governance and other issues as well as guarantee a unity in diversity among Nigerians.

Similarly, the President of the Senate, Godswill Akpabio, yesterday announced a 45-member constitution review committee on the 1999 Constitution to be chaired by the Deputy Senate President, Barau Jibrin, while the Senate Leader, Opeyemi Bamidele, will serve as deputy.

The committee would also comprise six lawmakers from each geopolitical zone and the Federal Capital Territory (FCT), Abuja.

The committee, which will be inaugurated next week Tuesday, will review the laws around artificial intelligence, state police, among others.

The Senate President also directed that all Speakers of the state House of Assemblies be invited to the National Assembly for interaction as part of the constitution amendment process.

There has been clamour for state police as Nigeria grapples with worsening security challenges such as kidnapping and banditry. Governors elected on the platform of the Peoples Democratic Party (PDP), had on Monday, restated their position on state policing, as the solution to the country’s worsening security situation.

Also, regional socio-political groups such as Afenifere, Ohanaeze Ndigbo, Middle Belt Forum, and the Northern Elders’ Forum, have repeatedly called for state police as a solution to the myriad of increasing security challenges confronting the nation.

Already, states in the Southwest geopolitical zone have formed the Amotekun while their counterparts in the Southeast also created state-owned security outfit Ebube Agu. The Benue Guards has also been operational in Benue State, while states like Katsina, Zamfara and other bandit-prone sub-nationals have also come up with similar state-established outfits.

However, these outfits have not been as effective as anticipated as they don’t have the backing of the Federal Government.

REACTING to the proposed bill by the 60 lawmakers, a former Minister of Education, Prof. Tunde Adeniran, said: “What we need now is a new constitution. The attempt to make the country a parliamentary system is like patching here and there. This will not work. If they consult widely, they will realise that the country needs a new constitution.”

A lawyer and former member of the Oyo State House of Assembly, Dr. Fatai Adesina, said: “Parliamentary democracy is less expensive compared to the presidential system of government. It fosters unity because members of the Executive will emerge from the parliament.  However, before we go back to the parliamentary system, we must restructure the country first. If there is no restructuring, the country will still remain the same.”

Chairman, Afenifere Renewal Group (ARG), Wale Oshun, who is also a former member of the House of Representatives, said the parliamentary system is the best option Nigeria should adopt now since the current presidential system has failed us. He said the presidential system did work for Nigeria in 1979 but it has not worked since 1999.

In another remark, Senator Teslim Folarin, who represented Oyo Central in the 9th National Assembly, also decried the disadvantages the presidential system has brought on the country. He harped on restructuring and devolution of powers to the federating units as a way out of the present quagmire.

Folarin, who spoke through his aide, Yekin Olaniyi, said: “Nigeria needs to return to the basis, which is the 1963 Constitution where the regional governments developed at their separate pace.”

The presidential candidate of Social Democratic Party (SDP), Adewole Adebayo, yesterday stated that the parliamentary system of government is inherently less stable than an executive presidential system.

He noted that anyone who is thinking of reverting to what was abandoned after the first republic should study what happened in the first republic.

“They should understand that the inherent instability of the parliamentary system in a diverse society such as ours, where politics brings a bit of desperation to different groups was the reason why we opted in 1979 for the presidential system and they should study the report and all the other background work that led to the setting up the constitution drafting committee that recommended that we follow the American system, which is inherently stable and which does not admit a confusion in the politics of the day to affect governance.

“So, you will see that in the First Republic, the Prime Minister could face a vote of no confidence at any time during the plenary of the parliament, and this made for parties to become very desperate to have the majority, and many of the alliances that were set up were just to have the government in place.

“I think we need to be careful in many of these innovations. I think we are running away from reforming our character, and we are trying to reform the form in which we play politics. It is not the form, either one will work. The parliamentary system requires more maturity, more integrity, more accommodation, and dexterity that we don’t have.

“Anyone who cannot run a presidential system successfully has zero chances of running the parliamentary system successfully. So, let us debate the issue, but I will most likely vote on the side of retaining the presidential system and reforming the character quality and integrity of who the persons and institutions running our constitutional arrangement are now.”